Spinoff from: Anyone was anti-vaccine, now pro thread

amother

Gray

Wed, Jul 29 2015, 2:24 pm

baschabad wrote:

Thank you for your responses! So, the way I see it, we are all laypeople. None of us are actually conducting studies, or able to identify scientific evidence. On the pro-vaccine side are the names and faces of trusted science, and on the anti-vaccine side are the laypeople-turned-researchers and smattering of medical professionals with counter-arguments.

Of course it makes sense to trust the science, unless you have personal reasons to do otherwise, in which case, the theorists are your friends.

Those who crossed from science to theory likely had a personal reason for doing so, rather than an actual understanding of the science. It's understandable that if someone's child suddenly fell ill in correlation with vaccination they would be wary of continuing.

So, does it work the other way as well? Do you travel from theory to science because your child contracted a vaccine-preventable disease, or at least from fear of disease?

After all, because we are not scientists, we each rely on our reading and comprehension abilities to make informed decisions. We're just each reading different stuff. So why would you start to respect one side over the other?

I want to thank baschabad for this post. But, I wanted to do so anonymously as a scientist working in vaccine development.

When people feel depressed, they are told to see a psychologist. People with heart attacks see physicians (even if they are anti-medical establishment). People that want to invest money, call a financial expert.

99% of anti-vaccine researchers are lay people turned researchers without equivalent training. Many people I speak to brush me off as biased. But, I go to the bank when I need a mortgage. A relative invests our money because my dh and I don't understand money. Neither am I a CEO, physician, nurse, secretary... No, I am not better than anyone. But, I do understand vaccine research and side effects. My question is and has always been, how do people easily throw off our background and education and think their critical reading skills of our work will bring them to an accurate understanding of vaccine research? I am not saying don't question and don't demand answers, but, I am saying why don't people TALK to experts and not ARGUE with them in this specific regard.

mille

Wed, Jul 29 2015, 5:46 pm

Well said. When I hear "none of us are scientists/researchers", I say, speak for yourself! LOL

I also believe that many researchers, even if not specifically in vaccine development, have the ability to critically review scientific studies. I do not work in vaccine development, but I have a lot of experience reading research studies and evaluating the validity and reliability of the content. I know how to look for small details in methodology that might point to a faulty study, and I know enough statistics to know what the numbers actually mean (rather than the buzz words of "statistically significant", which does not mean what many thing it means Tongue Out

). However, I do not feel that most people have this ability. This is not a criticism, but reviewing scientific literature is a skill that you must develop. Most just simply haven't had experience in it, which is okay.

I feel like reviewing abstracts of research studies when you are not a researcher, have not been trained in reviewing scientific research, don't know statistics, etc is akin to reading an poor english translation of gemara and paskening halacha. You think you know what you are reading, and you think it's enough to make a solid conclusion, but you are missing the bigger picture. This is why I don't think it's a matter of "we are all reading the material and making our own judgment"... I don't think everyone is equally capable of evaluating the material, which is why in EVERY field we must defer to experts. Be they doctors, researchers, rabbis, lawyers, accountants, etc.

amother

Apricot

Wed, Jul 29 2015, 7:19 pm

Millie and amother I thank you for your posts.
Whenever these discussions come up with family members I always say that I don't know what the right thing to do is, any article that I read can convince me either way if it's written well enough. Therefore I follow my dr and vaccinate following his schedule. I'm an experienced teacher and can make decisions about lesson planning, student interaction etc. But not this.
I'm looked at with pity like I'm gullible and stupid. Like I don't even have the intelligence to make such an important decision.

I honestly feel often like a neglectful mom when these conversations come up, but without the tools to do anything about it. So I really appreciate your post! Thank you! Very validating!

The Happy Wife

Wed, Jul 29 2015, 8:22 pm

amother wrote:

Experts in this field are clearly all paid off. You're probably filthy stinkin' rich from all the money Big Pharma has paid you, right? Or you were taught by people paid to feed you lies. (Who were probably paid off by the Jews, because we all know who runs world finances.)

Anyway, I'd love to stay and chat about this but I read online that Big Foot was just spotted in a crop circle and I've gotta go check that out.

sourstix

Wed, Jul 29 2015, 8:52 pm

I think what todays generation doesnt realize is. they havent seen what polio looks like. I happen to know some one with the disease and the affects. she was my kallah teacher. a wonderful woman. a tzadekes of her own. she is probably around 65. when you see these people you say, oh my this is a real disease. dont need to read science for that. and when I hear what my grandfather says, that in europe 4/5 children in every family passed away bec they didnt have vaccines, I understand and believe him. hes no lier. what more do I need?! reading doesnt tell you more then the obvious. let all people who dont know what all these diseases do, educate themselves and look at some pictures online or go to the library. reading blogs and listening to these women on hotlines is silly. they are not responsible for what will happen to your child. you are and following a doctor that can educate you instead of listening to whole bunch of women who know very little including me, isnt gonna do good. listen to your doctor he knows a thing or two.

amother

Plum

Wed, Jul 29 2015, 9:49 pm

sourstix wrote:

I havent met anyonone that has changed her mind in this aspect. I dont think they are until something severe happens. it has already started here in lakewood, with a 18 month old child that never received vax, and died of meningitis. that could have been avoided. what a sad story. I wouldnt forgive myself in such a situation. I feel sorry that she needed to learn this in such a painful way. I hope she got wiser. and didnt blame it on food coloring.

And you're positive that it was HiB-caused meningitis? That's the only type we actually have a vaccine for. And in fact, since we've nearly eliminated HiB, cases of non-HiB meningitis have greatly increased.

Which brings me to one of my major concerns with vaccines - I see why Americans like them. They are a quick fix. So easy. Get one little prick and avoid sickness. Why wouldn't we want that? The thing is that ALL quick fixes have long-term negative consequences. I believe Hashem made the world this way because there is a certain amount of suffering a person needs to go through and Hashem will make sure we get it, one way or another. So whether that's we avoid childhood diseases but live with lifelong allergies, asthma, etc., or we avoid the illnesses in childhood and then get them as teenagers or adults when they're much more serious, or we eliminate one type/strain of disease and what happens? Other, previously rare strains, become more common. This happened with Prevnar, and HiB as I mentioned previously. (ETA: And, in a different way, pertussis. They said, cocoon the newborns by making sure anyone who comes into contact with them gets the shot. Turns out vaccinated individuals still get sick and are still contagious, but won't have symptoms. So instead of knowing that Bubby has a cold so we'll keep the baby away from her, newborns were exposed to pertussis by people who had no idea they were spreading it.) And in general, any vaccine makes a person more susceptible to infection for a period of time afterwards.

I think there is psychological bias involved in the decisions made by vaccine policymakers - they love the idea of a quick fix. Just get everyone their shots and we can eliminate disease and suffering. That's VERY appealing. Aside from the money involved, which I won't even get into. Shochad yi'aver einei chachamim - there is a real psychological AND financial bribe here, so I don't believe I can trust them.

Lastly, while I am not a scientist, I do know (and correct me if I'm wrong) that there have been no large-scale, long-term studies comparing groups of children who were vaccinated according to the current schedule to groups of children who were not vaccinated in order to discover what the long-term effects (or not) of vaccines are. Which means - we really don't know.

greenhelm

Wed, Jul 29 2015, 10:20 pm

amother wrote:

You're nitpicking. I meant, all that we have a vaccine FOR INFANTS for. Obviously, as this was an 18-month-old in question.

Not nitpicking at all. In Ontario, menjugate is given at 12 months, bexsero can be given at 2 months, neisvac often given at 3 months (note: bexero and neisvac not publicly funded). Not to mention Hib vaccine given at 2, 4, 6 and 18 months.

eta: forgot to mention that menactra can be given after 12 months, but is publicly funded in Ontario in 7th grade, so not commonly given in infancy.

amother

Plum

Wed, Jul 29 2015, 10:29 pm

greenhelm wrote:

Sorry. Interesting. The only one of those that I'm familiar with is Menactra. My understanding is that they don't give it to infants in the US because the type of meningitis that it protects against either doesn't affects infants much/isn't dangerous in infants (don't remember which). In the US, only HiB is on the infant schedule.

Think1st

Thu, Jul 30 2015, 2:12 am

amother wrote:

As someone who make a living from developing vaccines, you have a financial interest.

Why shouldn't we rather trust some who does not make $ from developing selling or administering vaccines?

Think1st

Thu, Jul 30 2015, 2:18 am

sourstix wrote:

I havent met anyonone that has changed her mind in this aspect. I dont think they are until something severe happens. it has already started here in lakewood, with a 18 month old child that never received vax, and died of meningitis. that could have been avoided. what a sad story. I wouldn't forgive myself in such a situation. I feel sorry that she needed to learn this in such a painful way. I hope she got wiser. and didnt blame it on food coloring.

Where is you proof ? What is the source to your story? one of Robert Shanik's fabrications?

Iymnok

Thu, Jul 30 2015, 2:23 am

Think1st wrote:

As someone who make a living from developing vaccines, you have a financial interest.

Why shouldn't we rather trust some who does not make $ from developing selling or administering vaccines?

And trust someone who's not making a percentage off our mortgage and investments?
Making money doesn't make someone bad. Lab research is really interesting for some people. It can even bring in a parnassa. One who wants to try to find the truth should go through all the reports and studies comparing all the risks and benefits.
There are risks on both sides and benefits on both. Neither is totally bad or perfect.

amother

Gray

Thu, Jul 30 2015, 11:27 am

Think1st wrote:

As someone who make a living from developing vaccines, you have a financial interest.

Why shouldn't we rather trust some who does not make $ from developing selling or administering vaccines?

To debunk the salary myth: Any health professional makes more than a scientist in academia especially alternative practitioners. The NIH sets our salary. You can look it up, for a PhD, you get paid 42,800. Once you include taxes, commute and parking costs, my salary covers very, very little.

When your investment banker turns 20K into 1 million, he is a genius. When the HVAC tech fixes the AC on a 104 degree F day, he is brilliant. No, we are not professionals, we are simply biased... Maybe I should have tried to fix our car last week, the bill for the mechanic seemed a bit excessive!